Katherine Heigl: Ballbusting bigot?

Most people who hate Katherine Heigl hate the actress because she seems like a bit of a diva, or because she keeps appearing in annoying rom-coms, including one with Ashton Kutcher that hurts my head when I even think about it. The fellas at Register-Her.com have another reason: she hates balls. As in, testicles.

I can’t cut the nuts off human men … yet. So, I’ve dedicated my time to the neutering of dogs, cause that’s legal.

The joke here, as any rational person can plainly see, isn’t that cutting off balls is inherently hilarious. The joke is that an actress with a reputation as a diva is basically doing her critics one better by portraying herself as a deranged, narcissistic, supremely creepy ball-hater. And she’s spoofing her own bad reputation for a genuinely good cause: reducing cat and dog overpopulation and therefore the number of unwanted animals that are put to death in our nation’s animal shelters.

The actress’s willingness to endorse male targeted sexual mutilation betrays a bigoted indifference to sexual violence, and justifies her inclusion on this registry in the category of bigot.

Presumably the fellas at Register-Her will next go after the people who have posted the more than twenty thousand YouTube videos that feature dudes getting hit in the nuts. Surely these videos, which feature actual violence against actual human balls are a far graver threat to the balls of the world than even Katherine Heigl.

The Register-Her Action Squad might start by tracking down the (admittedly quite ingenious) ball-hating dudes involved in this video.

And then move on to all the ball-hating bigots featured here:

And here are 50 more:

Better track down the ghost of Scott Joplin, too, for providing the music to the last one from beyond the grave.

There really are some quite decent variously happy with Rand folks, but they tend to be scorned by the true believers, and very questioning of the Objectivist “orthodoxy” – EG the wonderful Chris Sciabarra.

And even given that… Yeah, their tendency to expell the saner and reformist from their midst makes them even more frickin’ annoying so… Yeah, libertarians who don’t like rand throw randroid around with contempt a LOT.

(Other then the turgid prose, which I think everyone with any taste in literature would find annoying.)

It is!

Well, her general contemptuous attitude, her defense of a state, the fact that she was VERY dismissive to libertarianism as a movement that didn’t WORSHIP her enough, her sloppy philosophy, her cultishness, (To quote the initially sympathetic Rothbard –
“The major lesson of the history of the [objectivist] movement to libertarians is that It Can Happen Here, that libertarians, despite explicit devotion to reason and individuality, are not exempt from the mystical and totalitarian cultism that pervades other ideological as well as religious movements. Hopefully, libertarians, once bitten by the virus, may now prove immune.” – We’re still waiting for the strain to run out, Murray…), her claim that

“”The trouble with the world today is philosophical: only the right philosophy can save us. But this party plagiarizes some of my ideas, mixes them with the exact opposite—with religionists, anarchists and every intellectual misfit and scum they can find—and call themselves libertarians and run for office.” Oh, god, I can go on all night…

Sharculese – “randianism is about orthodoxy. if youre the kind of sane person who believes in using dialogue to develop new ideas, randians are going to be a huge headache and a detriment to your movement. ”

-And yeah. That. We would agree to disagree, but they won’t let us, or shut up.

Really? I thought they were regarded as not so great. Maybe it’s the “dummies” part lol. Well so far I’m enjoying it anyway.

Also regarding Rand, I find her philosophy selfish. And while it’s important to think of yourself I don’t see how it benefits society as a whole. Overall though it’s her followers that bug me more, because none of them care for freedom as much as they say, only for themselves. I’d have to read her books to get a better understanding, but my list of books I need to read/am reading is long enough as it is and get first priority (hell my manga gets first priority over her :P )

This isn’t specifically why I hate Rand, but it does sum up everything that’s wrong with her: She idolized a child-murderer. Rand had this to say about a guy (or a character she based on him, to be specific) who kidnapped a 12-year-old girl, held her for ransom, and then cut her in half, drained her blood, dismembered her, sewed her eyes open, and propped her body up in a car for her father to see while he collected his ransom: He “is born with a wonderful, free, light consciousness — [resulting from] the absolute lack of social instinct or herd feeling. He does not understand, because he has no organ for understanding, the necessity, meaning, or importance of other people … Other people do not exist for him and he does not understand why they should.”

I had to read The Fountainhead in high school (part of our grade was based on entering the Ayn Rand Institute’s essay contest), which is only part of the reason why I tend to roll my eyes when people start talking about liberal indoctrination in public schools …

Most modern western economics (and most pre-modern, but post renaissance) tend to take a certain amount of capitalism as a granted for premises, which make them extremely tiresome for Marxists to read. Complicated theories built on false premises are only interesting as a thought experiment or to analyze how the opponent thinks, so I tend to find most works on economics boring as hell, because they tend built upon a set of basic premises that I would strongly dispute. Certain presumptions about value, ethics, capitalism, etc. that are almost universal are things which I do not accept.

Though I have two things I find annoying about most writings about eugenics and progressives. First, the failure to distinguish between mainline progressives and the actual left (this is common in discussions of politics in general, but pretending that progressive capitalists are the left is rather asinine, you’ll also not uncommonly see conservative people called progressives when modern conservatives which to use them against progressives, conflations of economic “progressivism” with social “progressivism”). Really, a huge mess of a failure to define what progressivism and progressive ideas are before naming people as them. This can get tricky in the US too as economic conservatives in the early 1800s tended to be anti-corporate whereas economic conservatives by the late 1800s were extremely pro-corporate…because the industrial revolution had caused massive legal and economic changes. Secondly, the failure to establish proper cultural context. There is a tendancy to blame progressives extra harshly for things which were widespread attitudes throughout the entire culture. So when the conservatives and the progressives by and large have mirror image ideas about a subject, with only a few details varied, progressives tend to be blamed more than their comparable conservative counterparts. Not that it isn’t fair to criticize progressive fuck ups, but the double standard is certainly unfair.

Really, a huge mess of a failure to define what progressivism and progressive ideas are before naming people as them. ”

“So when the conservatives and the progressives by and large have mirror image ideas about a subject, with only a few details varied, progressives tend to be blamed more than their comparable conservative counterparts. Not that it isn’t fair to criticize progressive fuck ups, but the double standard is certainly unfair.”

This so very much. Plus not only marxism gets left out, but a general and wild ignoring of just about all forms of radicalism in history, the left being simply the managerialist progressive left, and that’s all she wrote. Not even the Catholic Workers get much of a note, for heaven’s sakes.

I had to read The Fountainhead in high school (part of our grade was based on entering the Ayn Rand Institute’s essay contest), which is only part of the reason why I tend to roll my eyes when people start talking about liberal indoctrination in public schools …”

HAH! And this is why we need to move away from the factory schooling model and promote self directed supervised learning! Right there! You wouldn’t have to read Rand unless you needed to include it in your self-directed study plan and wanted to learn mor… Oh god, I need to rethink the self directed learning model after all

@ Cassandrasays: “Wow, she was arrogant. I can see why adolescents find her so eternally appealing.”

I Lol’d at this! It always* struck me as an incredibly juvenile, ethically stunted philosophy. It reminds me of myself at that age, sadly. I suppose having been through a similar phase as a PETA-bot I can kind of sympathize. I just don’t know what to say when I see adults embracing it.

*By always I mean as an adult, maybe 10 years or so ago when I first of heard of her.

***

To the rest of you and David, this is my first post here, so hello :) I just linked to this blog from Blag Hag (I think? I dunno, sometimes it’s a rabbit hole) and discovered the, um, “wonderfully” misanthropic world of MRAs. Which I suppose I always knew existed, at least in the darkest places of my darkest heart, but holy crap o.0 Seriously?

Anyway, I spent a couple of hours yesterday and today partaking in the horror and laughing at the posts and comments (in a good way, except for No Cuntry, who I totally think was that Whatever guy and was so relieved when someone finally said something), so thanks for simultaneously horrifying and amusing me :)

i was a randroid in high school and because i mentioned i was going to do it, my teacher made everyone enter the anthem essay contest (anthem was already on our reading list, so its not like i completely ruined everything)

Arks: Dude… you have no clue about how evolution works, or what, “survivial of the fittest means”.

I think this the first time I’ve ever said somethig like this (so you should feel honored, or something) but, for the good of the species, I sincerely hope every woman on earth is willing to symbolically kill you

it’s the latter. ron paul supporters can pretty much be divided into two groups: those who honestly believe that ron paul could zero out several executive branch departments on day one and want it to happen, and the ones who are like ‘weeeeelllll he couldnt actually do that, so its unfair to bring up the fact that he wants and promises to as a criticism of him’

I could sort of see very gradually phasing out some federal functions and passing others off to the states or to private industry. (Although I’d rather the feds held on to the nuclear weapons, thanks. It’s not that I trust them so much, but I trust anyone who’d take control of the nukes away from the DOE even less.)

But phrasing that as “No Department of Energy! BOOM!” doesn’t make me think you’re a Decider, it makes me worry that you think you can just ask everyone at the DOE to clean our their desks and the rest will take care of itself.

Now that I think about it, I’m not sure a mushroom cloud was a good choice for a graphic there.

:”It’s nice animation work, but the whole “we’ll just evaporate a bunch of major government functions” thing is either very poorly explained or it’s more naive than 9-9-9.”

Bingo. It’s just posturing, since he knows he can’t DO it. But …

Watch this video for a great explanation of how stupid and utterly chaotic this would be if he attempted to enact it. I don’t always agree with Molyneux, but god, this is beautiful.

(As for me and federal functions – Anarchist. Want to build alternative social order before knocking the fed down. Don’t think cutting at it is gonna work. Love privatization, but not the way it’s gonna happen in the state-corporate climate. Blackwater bad. Power to the workers. Blah blah blah. )

Oh crap, I entered that Ayn Rand contest in high school too. Aren’t scholarships against the whole Objectivist philosophy anyway? I assume they gave it to the kid who turned in a blank sheet of paper because he refused to be a leech on society’s winners by accepting charity instead of starting his own nineteenth-century railroad monopoly.

(Actually, my real assumption is that there is no scholarship.)

HAH! And this is why we need to move away from the factory schooling model and promote self directed supervised learning! Right there!

You know, cutting government spending in the middle of a recession is a terrible idea. Direct government spending has some of the most effective stimulus effects, especially during a demand recession like this recession. Taxes are less effective, because if the government spends money it gets spent, but if it gives people money some of them will save it or use it to pay off debts, neither of which creates jobs.

Also, I notice he says nothing about cutting defense which, if we’re going to start cutting things, is where I’d start.

well, to be fair, ron paul would cut defense. he’s extremely critical of the military industrial complex. it’s his only good point and probably the reason he’s got the most attention.

he also has a bad habit of thinking he can use it as a bludgeon, though. i remember in one of the ’08 republican primary debates, right after that american ship got hassled by iranian paramilitary in speedboats, britt hume asked all the candidates how they felt about the captain’s decision not to respond with force. they uniformly said that it was his decision and they weren’t going to question it, but when he got to paul, dude still tried to take down everyone for being militaristic and aggressive.

you know those shitty video of rand paul trying to bully some senate committee witness with his ideological platitudes? he got it from his daddy.

I had to read The Fountainhead in high school (part of our grade was based on entering the Ayn Rand Institute’s essay contest), which is only part of the reason why I tend to roll my eyes when people start talking about liberal indoctrination in public schools …

And all these years I thought I was the only one who had to do this. I feel so much less alone right now.

well, rand appears to have inherited all of his dad’s terrible ideas (and feels more comfortable spouting the really terrible aspects) without inheriting his suspicion of american military power. it’s the worst of both worlds.

Bingo – He gets all of daddy’s republican and none of his libbertarian. And I don’t like his hair. But regardless, the times you hear “Libertarian Rand Paul” .” NOOOOO! HE’S JUST A REPUBLICAN, IT’S NOT LIKE A GENETIC THING! WE HAVE PLENTY OF ASSHOLES BUT THIS ONE ISN’T OURS!! WHAAAH! *sniffle*

I also wrote a Rand-based essay for The Fountainhead! I remember sort of finding Roark intriguing at first, because he was written like he was going to be a god, but really, he was just stilted and unpleasant. And then there was the “sex” scene. Oh my. Not a pleasant memory.

Ron Paul delivered those babies, they must have caught it from him or something. The doctor who delivered me was from what is now North Korea. Is that why I am such a commie? XD

Oh, and we know why HUD is on that list, because most of the primary functions of HUD is to housing the poor and developing infrastructure in poor neighborhoods, and no one hates the poor like Ron Paul and co.

the RH team could probably get away with freedom of expression or even agreeing to merely remove Heigl, a small price to pay for the attention a suit would bring to the site.

I’m not sure they want attention, though I’lll accept that they think they want attention.

Ullere:

Honestly I couldn’t say that the MRM has a set mainstream view

So what you’re saying is that id ozy went into a typical MRA forum — Spearhead, say — identifying as an MRA, the regulars there would have no sound basis on which to dispute this?

Do you actually believe that’s what would happen?

Slavey:

@Kyrie
We still wait for one self declared MRA group that actually does something for men’s rights and does not despise women.”

We do. We fight for equal custody. An end to debtor prison.

All that falls on the second part of what Kyrie said. Also, fighting illusory enemies doesn’t count as “doing something.” I, too, disapprove of licensing laws requiring men — and only men — obtain a permit from the government before sending e-mails, but I don’t fight those laws because they don’t exist.

Holly:

Either take care of the house or pay for the house to be taken care of. You don’t get to choose “neither” and expect your wife to keep the house and never ask you for money.

It makes perfect sense if you start from the premise that all money and property is rightfully men’s. In this view, if you have a woman in her life, of course you’ll buy her food and things, but when and how you want, just as if you have houseplants you water them when and how you want. If she asks for money, or things that cost money, on her terms, she’strying to take money from (or direct the spending of, which comes to the same thing) a man. If she works at a paying job, she’s taking money from men also: from the man who deserves that job and, probably, from the man she works for. She ought to be some man’s houseplant instead.

Holly:

not every divorce is a woman betraying a loyal man. Sometimes the man initiates the divorce. Sometimes he becomes abusive. Sometimes he just up and disappears. That seems a lot more like “being laid off” than “quitting” to me.

Or constructive termination, at any rate.

Shora:

which I somehow think is less related to nutrition than it is for women selectively choosing only the most cervix jackhammering of alpha dicks.

Please NEVER EVER HAVE SEX WITH A WOMAN if you think it is pleasurable for women to have their cervix “jackhammered”

Of course it’s not pleasurable. But pleasure isn’t the point. Women run the world by rewarding the dominatingest men with sex and punishing the rest by not having sex with them, and cervix jackhammering is dominance.